About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
't heard the obama administration do that yet. is that the issue right now? >> well, as the prime minister said to the general assembly today, wolf, the drawing of the red line is designed to give diplomacy and sanctions more time to work. we believe by drawing that red line you won't be increasing the chances of military engagement, you'll be significantly lessening the chances of a military engagement because the iranians have been presented with red lines in e past in trai of hormuz and they've backed down. we know they can see the color red. we're engaged in a conversation with the obama administratio about setting limits to iran's enrichment process because that's the part of the iranian nuclear program that we can actually see and mor. and that the part that's in facilities that areservle and are still lnerable. and so the obama administration's engaging with in a dialogue t it. you mention tt the secretary of state will be meeting with the prime minister this evening. thidengt willalking netanyahu tomorrow. th p of an ongoing dialogue that we've had to reach an understanding about
of preemptive strike against iran, imagine that happens, what does the obama administration do if it's still in power come november and the election? what do you do? >> well, i mean, that's the dilemma in terms of turning to military action that may well be necessary at some point. israel probably has -- certainly has the capability to in some ways delay, you know, the advance towards that nuclear line, but perhaps does not have the ability to destroy the entire program. and that's the conundrum when you get to military action is in many respects, if you start this fight, one of two things has to happen. you have to continue to regime change as we did in iraq. that's a legitimate policy option but obviously a very expensive one. but the other is should it not destroy iran's nuclear program, you probably make that iranian bomb inevitable, because you can destroy facilities but you can't destroy knowledge. >> richard williamson, let's assume mitt romney wins in november. his rhetoric has been even stronger against president ahmadinejad and iran. what would a romney administration do if israel
have been critical of the u.s. policy toward iran. saying the obama administration has a cavalier attitude. how do they have a cavalier attitude? >> the idea you are going to stop them from becoming nuclear by just saying things like all options are on the table or -- >> isn't that what mitt romney said, all options are on the table? >> mitt romney is not the president of the united states. the president of the united states should be communicating he will take military action. >> no person says we are going to bomb you. george w. bush said all options are on the table. >> i remember they did that with ronald reagan. he was pretty successful. reagan said he was going to take military action and pointed missiles and made it clear. >> so reagan said all options are on the table plenty of times. >> this was a long time ago when bush was dealing with iran. iran was five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten years away from becoming nuclear. iran now could be a month away, two months away, two years away. under president obama iran has by three times increased the uranium and made it much more
, what sort of relationship should the united states have with iraq now. how did the obama administration handle the end of the war and where do we go from here. >> those are all important questions, but the whole war was built on a faulty prim is that saddam had weapons of mass destruction. >> i think it's conceded that they didn't have weapons of mass destruction. >> i remember i was in kuwait on the eve of the war. i had a gas masks, they were really fed basically a lie, if you will. >> no, i don't agree. i think that the intelligence was poor and badly done, but i do think -- >> when i say a lie, i mean the sources who were providing that intelligence, these false iraqi sources who were claiming there was poisonous gas here, chemical weapons there, that was a lie. >> i was imbedded for that period and i remember general conway was ahead of the marine forces and they intercepted the code word blood which they thought was the use of chemical weapons. >> the american forces believed that they would face chemical weapons. i remember skud missiles coming in. they believed it. i'm just sayi
court is now back in session for the first time since it ruled on the obama administration's landmark health care law last june. so how might mitt romney change the high court if he becomes president of the united states? he's already giving all of us some major clues. let's bring in cnn's crime and justice correspondent joe johns who's taking a closer look. what are you seeing? >> the supreme court doesn't get talked about that much on the campaign trail. but choosing a justice is one of the most important things a president does. it's how on administration puts its mark on some of the nation east toughest, most divisive issues. and we have a look at how mitt romney might handle it if he's president. whenever mitt romney fielded questions during the primaries about his picks for the supreme court, he was armed with a stock republican answer. >> what i would look to do would be to appoint people to the supreme court that will follow strictly the constitution as opposed to to legislating from the bench. >> reporter: but he wouldn't choose a favorite. >> would you pick one, please? >> y
what happened the first two years of the obama administration, and democrats should have been able to do anything they wanted to do, and now is when that should pay off. we shouldn't be worried about what happened last month and how that impacts the economy because, frankly, we've had no budget, no appropriations bills. the majority in the senate, i think, will change because people are tired of a senate that won't do the things that need to be done. >> let me ask you about the state of the race in missouri. this is where you had congressman akin who made a ve controversial remark, which you condemn, which others condemn. you, in fact, said at the time we do not believe it sefshz the national interest for congressman todd akin to stay in the race for senate. the issues at stake are too big, and it's simply too important. the right decision is to step aside. as we all know todd akin did not step aside. he is running as the republican. you are looking as though -- the republicans are looking as though they're going to lose that race because akin stayed in it. >> i think at the end of
of relief. not just in the obama administration but many who said, look, the deadline is next spring, next summer. there isn't going to be a possible israeli military strike before the election. but iran is doubling down. just today prime minister ahmadinejad back in tehran gave a press conference. and he said this, brooke, i'll quote him "we are not people to retreat on the nuclear issue. if somebody thinks they can pressure iran, they are certainly wrong and must correct their behavior." at least in terms of words, which actions are more important than words, but in terms of words not backing down at all. from is going to be the crucial question for the next president whether it's barack obama or mitt romney. >> absolutely. erin burnett, thank you very much. >> good to see you, brooke. >> good to see you. see you tonight
hours of the attack that it was an act of terrorism. yet the obama administration was cautious in saying so and has only started to acknowledge a terrorist link to the attack. this was in the last few days. on "360" last night, bob baer was asked specifically about that. >> i think it's political. i think the white house is reluctant to admit that libya has been lost or potentially lost. no administration wants to admit that. i think, frankly, we can't blame losing libya on this administration. you know, it was in the works for a long time. there wasn't much it could do. nonetheless we have an election coming up and no one wants to take blame for messing up the arab spring. >> the u.s. ambassador to libya, chris stevens was wrong those killed in that attacks. >>> mitt romney and president obama will both be campaigning in virginia today. they were both in ohio yesterday. you see a trend here? check out the gop challenger in suburban cleveland. getting his hands dirty with the host of discovery's "dirty job" show. the president also in ohio siting the campus of bowling green yesterday. he
, the administration sent susan rice out to tell everybody it was because of some youtube clip. so today's speech was not a great moment in the obama presidency. that's for sure. >> colin, what do you take -- think about this claim that al qaeda is weakened? certainly in some regards it is, at least when it comes to afghanistan. but in africa, extremist groups linked to al qaeda in some way, shape or form, they are certainly on the rise. so what do you think about the truth of the statement overall? >> it's absolutely true. it's objectively true. besides the fact that osama bin laden is now dead, more senior leaders in al qaeda have been removed from the battlefield in the last three-and-a-half years than in any comparable period since 9/11. and it's not just in afghanistan and pakistan. it's also in yemen, it's in somalia. and it's -- and it's elsewhere. so i think you're right that there are still affiliates of al qaeda that are active, and we still relentlessly pursue them. but there is no question that al qaeda is a weaker organization today than when president obama took office, and i think
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)